After looking at the new beta, I have a few comments. It is time for serious discussion AND the DEVS to listen to us.

[samuelb]

W.T.H.

Being disgruntled with something has got the square-root of naff all to do with money over time, as such, value for money as you put it... What a stupid argument...


I was going to write a reply to this unintelligent dross and then remembered some sage advice;

Do not argue with idiots for they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

 

[VR Golgot]

I love Elite, but it does need some more gripping missions. I think this is why people end up complaining of grinding for better ships/upgrades - because there's little to do in between getting that upgrade to enjoy or new ship to fly. The missions are too samey, although hopefully chained missions will help somewhat with this. However, here are some ideas I think would fit with Elite and would help make the day-to-day something more engaging and "less grindy."
.
1. Scrap the current military ranking system.
.
First, I'd let those who got the rank to keep the ships they unlocked. It would be unfair to snatch them away from people. But beyond that, reset everyone to civilians and make them join the military if they want rank. You can only join one military at a time - no-one works for the US military and the Russian military simultaneously. Even powerplay doesn't allow this. So stop ranking up in both Empire and Fed. Next, if you want to work for the military, you have to WORK for the military.
.
So you sign up and get assigned a tour of duty. You're new, so best you are getting is to patrol some outlying system. You can either fly your own ship or get assigned one by the military. Obvious advantages and disadvantages either way (your own ship might be superior to what you are assigned, so that's better. But if you get a military-owned ship blown up, they pay the insurance). You do simple patrol runs, scanning ships and dealing with criminals. Combat should be improved to allow for a clearer ability to simply disable a target - that way its not "murder every criminal," plus you get the added play of having to defend the "police van," as it flies in, docks and arrests the criminal. Perhaps nothing happens. Perhaps his mafia buddies show up and try and rescue him. Things to do!
.
Your tour of duty can expand as you get chained missions to scout nearby systems and scan for pirate bases and all culminate in taking down the local pirate lord and brining a bit of peace to an outlying system. Its simple enough that its the sort of story that can happen multiple times (so doesn't feel like every player is playing the same hero character) and can have different missions chained up in different lengths and orders to make it not repetitive. Once your tour is done, you get a promotion and some perks and its either off back to civvie life or sign up for another tour (or off to civvie life and come back later to sign up again). Later tours can be bigger missions against other powers, rather than criminals and perhaps even be assigned as part of a fleet attached to a capital ship. People could spend moths just being in the navy and never doing anything else.
.
.
2. Dynamic missions encountered in space.
.
Instead of just picking missions up off the board, have them discovered in USS sites. Respond to a distress call and you might end up escorting a Princess back to her homeworld. Or perhaps you just rescued a dictator under stack by rebels and only discover this as you approach the homeworld. Maybe you decide to switch sides and blow him away. Or take the bigger paycheck and waste those rebel scum. Or turn on both and steal all their cargo.
.
Essentially, let us encounter missions in the void and have a simple narrative unfold from a set of branching options. Yes, eventually you will encounter enough randomly-generated missions that you will see the same basic missions repeating. But then these are the sort s of things that will happen to a lot of people, so why not? Try making a different choice on a later mission. There will also be room for Frontier to add in new missions over time, too.
.
.
3. Sort out crime and punishment
.
Yes, I know this is a big issue regarding griefing, but that's not the reason I'm suggesting it here. If you commit murder, then you should be hunted. If you are a serial killer, you are going to have your name on wanted lists across the galaxy. If you join the Imperial Navy, you will not be welcome in Federation space unless on a diplomatic mission and vice versa. If you are a bounty hunter who preys on a specific pirate faction, don't expect to be welcome at any of their bases. Make there be a good reason why the scum of the galaxy congregates in anarchy systems and honest traders stick to well-policed trade routes. Make me feel like the world around me is responding believably to my actions. If I want to role-play Han Solo, then I expect to be interdicted by the odd Imperial cruiser and have crime lords putting a price on my head when I fail to deliver their cargo. Make me persona-non-grata in systems where I've off the locals. Make allies come running to my aid when I've made an ally of a faction. Make me feel like my actions have consequences on other people.
.
.
4. Dynamically generate my character profile.
.
Taking into account the above systems, let my character become known by certain traits. Let's say I turn on my employer during an assassination mission because the other side offers me more money. I'll start to build up a reputation as treacherous. Or if I never break a contract and always support the same side, I'll start to be known as loyal. If I open fire first a lot, I'll become known as hot-headed or trigger happy. If I try and talk my way out of situations, I'll be known as diplomatic.
.
Going back to role-playing Han Solo - I shouldn't simply get to write some text saying I'm a smuggler who's only out for number one, but occasionally might stop to rescue a Princess in distress. If I want to be that character, I have to BE that character. Create a reputation that other players can see. Become famous or infamous in the galaxy. Or just be a quiet privateer who is satisfied to know that those few who know him, think he's trustworthy.
.
Then have this all feed back into the prior new mission system. Your reputation will affect what options become available. If you are known as moral, then the downtrodden rebels are more likely to ask you to join their fight. If you are known for only playing with the highest bidder, then only those who can afford you will bother offering you money. If you are treacherous, then anyone who deals with you will be constantly looking over their shoulder. Heck, perhaps they might even try to fail to pay you and murder you at the end of a mission. Treachery breeds treachery.
.
.
Essentially, gives us more to do in missions and make our choices count. Blaze our own trail, one might even say.

Great list

I've got some hope that we'll see movement in a few of these areas. Possibly the most concrete stuff floated is the C&P stuff, so it was good to hear that they're 'still very interested in looking at a karma system' in the most recent Q&A. If it arrives in anything like the form they hashed out it could provide some of that good stuff (station lockouts making anarchies the base locations for hardcore crims etc).

It was also good hear a reference to increased NPC permanence in the Q&A, as it suggests the old DDF 'tier 2' permanent NPCs are still in their plans. They wouldn't add the complete character definition that you mention, but a 'Nemesis system' style set of local relationships could go a long way towards making that feel real.

Chained missions finally arriving does also give me a flutter of hope that more adventurous, personalised and fitting missions will one day come. It still doesn't speak to 'You're the renowned smuggled Spam Polo, I know you!', but it could get closer to allowing us to cause those kinds of narratives by our actions. The mission guys seem to hope it's the start of better things, and not just in the sense of longer chains. They're desire to link proc gen events into missions is encouraging (and should fit with your 'mission starts in space' hopes). But again, doubtless a long road . As with their mutterings about making mili missions more of a 'career', guess time will tell.

I think there's enough there to suggest they want to move in a lot of good directions. Just gotta hope they can and do . And keep encouraging them to do so

 

[samuelb]

Nobody judges a game on it's value for money. What planet do you live on?

Err... yes they do. The amount of play time you get from a game == your enjoyment of it as < enjoyment = < time played, no?

I am constantly amazed at how many "clever" people are on this forum given the "mature" audience.

Well, nevermind, fly safe CMDR.

 

[Jex =TE=]

Cant have deep lore... Because to have that requires consequences and consequences create restrictions, which prevent players from doing what they want when they want.

They have literally made this a sandbox game, do what you when you want.

I just want the game I was sold at the very beginning, the one where it was the Elite Universe, not this shallow imitation. The one where David Braben stood on stage and stated in front of the audience he wanted a game where players actions have real consequences.

Yep this. Easy access to everything is what makes a game bad, not good. It gives the game even less meaning than it already has and easy means nothing worth playing for. it means casual, lazy, can't be bothered so we'll just take the easy route.

 

[jasonbarron]

That woman is a National Treasure!

Have some rep, because this is the most productive comment on the thread today

 

[Jex =TE=]

Ok, but FDev have floated a lot of ideas with 'no promises, no timeframe' caveats. They've had 2+ years to address C&P and done nothing.
For example, they've explicitly turned down the idea of a heftier fine for killing Cmdr's, or adding the Cmdr's rebuy to the killer's fine saying that it's too restrictive when it's fairly restrictive for the dead cmdr who has to pay it.
(This is implying that player killing is all I care about, it's not at all)

Saying " 'role freedom' = 'no meaningful galaxy change' " is overstating it for me, system faction can change and that can have a limited impact on the services/products and system states available.
But, consequences for changing a faction to one non-compliant with the Power? Nada. What about interaction with the BGS and community goals, (opposing a faction only to have them welcome you with open arms the next time you dock), or ranking with both the empire and federation at the same time, or shooting/not shooting a thargoid/barnacle/UA/UP and them not caring two hoots when you finally meet them, or having no way of interacting with NPC's other than using your guns, or flitting between powers and them not caring what your background is.

That is what FDev has given us so far with this approach. Without concrete, in game mechanics to the contrary I'm inclined to believe that this approach will lead to more of the same. Consequences are important, they DO impart meaning, what you want when you want doesn't. I'm not at all saying consequences should be permanent, but rank with the Empire and there should be an obstacle to then ranking with the Feds, eg. turning the Empire hostile.

- - - Updated - - -


Yes, exactly.

Your post made me think that ED has nothing but massive "I WIN" buttons all over the place. Even suicidwinderiwinbutton. AI sucks - I WIN!! Exploration - I WIN!!!! Trading - I WIN!!!! Fed/Imp ranks I WIN!!!!!

Is there anyway at all in this game of actually losing?

 

[robbyp]

Lol, how do I give negative rep?

You can't. Don't you know?

 

[Blackcompany]

Do the devs listen? Yes.

Are they always capable of doing what players want? No.

Does what players want always match FDs vision? No.

OP - as an early backer, by now you should know that FD are making the game they want, and what they implement doesn't always match what others want. Its an impossible task. What i want doesn't match what you want. I think i can say that with confidence, because what i want, and what you want, doesn't match what anyone else wants really.

Players leaving? Sure, it happens. Players joining, also happening. We get new player threads all the time in the newcomers forum, on reddit, and Steam.

You know what, there are games i've stopped playing over the years. Some i return to. Sometimes games still in development. Are those games dead or dying? Well, some of them perhaps, some are still very much alive. I haven't played Ark in months, but its a good game. I play GTA5 perhaps a couple of days a month, its a good game. Chaos Reborn, love that game, not played it in months. ED unfortuately gets in the way of other games. Just started playing Paladins as well with the kids, we have our own small team, good fun, but ill probably stop playing at some point. Doesn't mean the devs are doing anything wrong.

Basically, what i think you are doing here is saying that YOU are not happy with the direction of development and FD's priorities, and seeking confirmation of this. You're going to get a lot of it. But you know what, all those people agreeing with you, well, if FD did exactly as you wanted, some of those would be writing posts like yours, and some of those disagreeing with you right now would be praising FD for the development direction. As i noted, we all want something different.

Bottom line, i could write a Gluttony Fang sized text on what i think is wrong with the game and what FD should do, but i would never say that FD need to listen to me, at least no more than anyone else. They listen to not just the forums, but all other social media, as well as their game designers and devs, emails they get, perhaps even some people take the time to hand write letters to FD, praising or criticisng them. They get more than enough feedback.

At the end of the day, its up to them which feedback they think is useful, and what they can and are willing to do.

Cheers.

Oh...The game they want argument again, is it?

How quaint.

Because the promised backers a game, too. And that decidedly is NOT the game they are making. Claiming your making the game you want is nice and all. But it doesn't matter if no one else wants to buy it. And sales aren't exactly stellar, especially for Horizons, and that's straight from FDev.

But sure. Keep hiding behind this quaint little notion. It's not masking the poor decisions (always online, multi year MMO) or the tech limitations (over reliance on P2P, instances, long load times) but sure, keep thinking otherwise.

The ostrich is perfectly safe in the tiger den. So long as he keeps his head in the sand, there can't possibly be anything wrong.

 

[Quinliven]

If anyone here ever says "But you always complain and NEVER give ideas!!!" I suggest referring them to this post

Thanks!
.
I was thinking more about how that sort of mission system could improve other areas of Elite. For instance, the current nerf being done to shield boosters. I won't go into the pros and cons of that, only that we all know that there are very differing views on it! But think of a situation where you are on patrol duty. You are most definitely a combat pilot, but if you've outfitted every utility slot with shield boosters, then you can't scan your targets for illicit cargo. If you don't have a wake scanner, you can't track the fleeing pirate back to his base.
.
Same would be true of other "discovered in the void," missions. What might start out as exploration might end up as combat. Or combat might turn into a rescue mission. ie. if you go out in a build without some flexibility, you are going to end up at a disadvantage. Sure, you have uber-impenetrable shields, but what good is that if you fail the mission because you can't scan your targets? Make those other modules more useful. Perhaps we could use scanners to pinpoint weaknesses in enemy shields, so good scanners even become a counter to blunt force.
.
I'd also add that some diversity to the environment would be nice, in terms of adding tactics. eg. heavy metal asteroids may mess up targeting on low-grade sensors. So fleeing into an asteroid field could be a good escape plan and even allow you to turn the tables on an attacker if they foolishly follow you in. One of the best parts of Star Trek 2 was how they used the nebula to balance the playing field when outgunned. Having environments that make shields useless would be interesting in Elite. Especially if such environments might not be obvious if you aren't carrying some exotic sensors. Perhaps you need some new particle scanner utility module to pick up radiation emitting from a planet's rings. Your attacker doesn't know this because he's short-sightedly fitted his Fer-De-Lance with six shield boosters. Silly boy! Now he's going to follow you into that field, unaware that his shields are about to drop. Or unaware that flying in there at full speed with an overcharged thruster is about to ignite a volatile gas and see his top speed cut by 50%. Should have flown with more scanners and he wouldn't have been massacred by that sneaky Sidewinder he was hunting. That pilot was clever enough to use his scanners to lure the bigger ship into a trap, use the environment to counter his opponent's advantages and perhaps ended the engagement by using his own plasma accelerator to ignite that previous pocket of gas again and send the poor Ferdie into an uncontrollable dive towards the nearest asteroid.
.
Just some ideas to both spice up a combat engagement and to make non-shield boosters also useful in a combat situation - meaning that smart combat players would stop carrying six boosters because it actually puts them at a disadvantage.

 

[AkimuMC]

Your post made me think that ED has nothing but massive "I WIN" buttons all over the place. Even suicidwinderiwinbutton. AI sucks - I WIN!! Exploration - I WIN!!!! Trading - I WIN!!!! Fed/Imp ranks I WIN!!!!!

Is there anyway at all in this game of actually losing?

Not really...

 

[SkipRat]

The problem isn't that there aren't any good suggestions on this forum. The problem is that the good ideas get drowned out by the torrent of bad.

This entire thread started because there are a fair few of us who enjoy the game but don't feel inclined to play it. Reasons were given. If you want an example of whining go into Toys R Us on a Saturday morning (actually don't, I wouldn't want to inflict that on anyone).

Can we start a ban on the following words: Griefing, Whining, Fanboy, Fanboi? There's a whole plethora of rich descriptive words to choose from. Be more adventurous!

Nope, because that what it is. Whining, you can't have a, b and c because I only have 30 mins a week to play. Therefore the game should make as rich as possible as quickly as possible so I can get anaconda in time.

The removed cost from the game, because people whined it cost to much to repair a ship that cost 800 million credits has been smacked down to 1% hull and integrity... Of course its going to cost a futune...

So yeah, thats whining and that's the **** Fdev have pampered too.

 

[Jex =TE=]

The problem with the 'we're making the game we want' line that Frontier used to trot out quite regularly from my point of view AA is that they used to say that while at the same time producing the old Dev diaries and the like. Back then, making the assumption that the Dev diaries content, the DDF and the concepts shown was actually the game they wanted to make then I was well and truly onboard with that, sadly, in my opinion at least, what we have now is quite far removed from all that. I am struggling to see, given Frontier's previous visions for their game, and given what we have now and will have can both be 'the game they want to make/play' let alone the kickstarter many of us backed.

I get that things change, I get that scope has to be altered but to be frank some of Frontier's direction and vision hops have been hard to comprehend.

For the last 2.5 years we've watched FDev cater to the casual crowd. Basic gameplay, easy mode, can't lose, always win, shallow repetitive gameplay as been the norm. We've had people defend it and yet I've not heard anyone say nope, enough is enough. The time for cartering that way is at an end and it's time for a new direction.

If anyone disagrees with this then please explain why you get 2.5 years of naff gameplay added and everyone else can take a hike. We've done that for 2.5 years and would kindly ask you all go take a hike for the same period and when you come back, we'll have a better game waiting for you

- - - Updated - - -

I have no idea...I hear this from players who were ks players and Im only here 9 months, so I literally have no memory of so called roadmap. I have searched and found nothing...the search continues but patience aint what they were and my time on this forum is decreasing along with my time in the game. Im caring less than I used to.

There are other symptoms...thats just one the big 2 with the other being the ongoing issue with exploration not being developed. The two reeasons relate to each other as I wanna be as far away from the toxicity of the bubble as I can get.

Anyway whatever...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=36

Read it and weep....

 

[amadeus1171]

Opening up the game to a user side api would go a long way to adding gameplay we can create for each other. To prevent abuse/exploitation, each user module can be initially and periodically reviewed.

FD needs to hire more programmers that specialize in artificial intelligence and gameplay. This game could be a fun playground for ai developers.

 

[GreyedOut]

Hello there. I might not be the best person to judge Elite game-play as I've not even played it yet, despite buying it in Sept. 2014 (because I wanted to support FD), but I'm following it pretty closely and lurking on these forums, watching gameplay videos etc.

What to me Elite seems to be sorely lacking is truly unique experiences a player can have. Something permanent, persistent. It was fun to see the first interdiction by the alien ship, but then when it started to happen to anyone who went to that region and each and every encounter played out the same, it was fast disappointing. We need events, things that are one-off. Someone finds them, BAM!, it's gone forever to the other players, but the discoverer gets the bragging rights. This way, players will feel more incentive to go explore. The problem with this is that these "events" must be hand-crafted, and thus they will be extra rare. (due to the time and effort required to making them) They could last for let's say a couple of days, or have some limited supply, so that at least several players can still interact with it, but not too many. The Community Goals are something like it, but they aren't remotely interesting or elaborate enough to warrant the players attention.

I've read somewhere above about a "reputation" system, that also ties in to this, we need permanently stored merits, achievements, discoveries, actions for the pilots to feel that they are different than the rest - and mark that in-game, as bragging in the forums is kinda... pen-and-paper like. Currently, all pilots are completely the same, as far as the game is concerned. Reputations, rankings, ships, everyone can achieve everything regardless of any choice made during any previous game-time.

TLDR; Game needs to provide players with choices which lead to permanent consequences, only THEN can you claim you blazed your own trail.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I didn't say all gamers but if you've been a gamer for 4 decades, how is it you haven't moved on in that time? That simple, basic whack-a-mole combat is still interesting to you? That unchallenging gameplay is fun? The doing the same thing, over and over again for no real purpose, for 2 years and you're still happy with that?

I don't understand that. I want my games to improve upon the games before them. I expect them to keep in the things that worked, improve or remove the things that didn't and add in more gameplay as well as update the graphics.

I also expect anyone who's been gaming for decades to move along with the times and agree that game play mechanics from 30 3 decades ago just don't cut it in the modern gaming world. Why would I want to play a game that I found interesting as a kid? I've grown up - my brain has matured - it requires more complex and engaging gameplay.

No no, don't deflect. You effectively said anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. If you are willing to back down on that, meaning you are up for an open and honest discussion, then i'll answer your questions.

 

[Jex =TE=]

We haven't seen the best bits of 2.3 yet (apparently).

If you went back to just before 2.0 luanched and said

"We haven't seen the best bits of 2.3 yet (apparently)." and then you looked back right now on that comment, would you expect to see "the best bits" coming along from a developer that thinks exploration is fine, C&P don't need addressing as a piriority, adding in new space stations is somehow "fun", Piracy needs no more work, powperplay can forget more dev time, MC will somehow be fun after 10 hours of trying it....

- - - Updated - - -

YEAH! I agree. That would be like picking a mortgage by how much fun you have whilst paying it

LMAO!

Ooooh what fun these monthly payments are...let's make a song about it!

 

[verminstar]

For the last 2.5 years we've watched FDev cater to the casual crowd. Basic gameplay, easy mode, can't lose, always win, shallow repetitive gameplay as been the norm. We've had people defend it and yet I've not heard anyone say nope, enough is enough. The time for cartering that way is at an end and it's time for a new direction.

If anyone disagrees with this then please explain why you get 2.5 years of naff gameplay added and everyone else can take a hike. We've done that for 2.5 years and would kindly ask you all go take a hike for the same period and when you come back, we'll have a better game waiting for you

- - - Updated - - -



https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=36

Read it and weep....

The three pages of archived threads? Thats where I have been searching and found nothing. Now searched three times, thanks for the effort but still dont see it Im afraid ^

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Or you could you know...just answer the damn question and not berate someone on your perceived slight. Perhaps if you had read the rest of the posts some of the previous people were saying the same incorrect or opinion based things as you had. Maybe he was tired of hearing for the 3rd time in the same thread.

But then again what do I know. I only read the thread and know for a fact that text and speech are 2 different things and do not translate together in a perfect fashion. So take offense where you will.

I hope you don't yell at the pizza delivery guy because you didn't like the textual tone of the receipt email was generated when you ordered it Online.

Well the OP is now attacking people who supported his point of view because the pointed out that having 10 billion plus dollars could not be gained by anything other than an exploit.

That remains true regardless as to what anybody states. Been playing since launch day in open for the most part. Just now hitting close to a billion in assets. 1000 plus hours now invested. If you really have 10 billion from rare trading alone, then I can see why you are bored.

Anyways I am done defending your point of view. Generally ungrateful and confrontational regardless to the truth.

So let this thread die. Cant have a proper discussion without OP taking every side of the argument accept for the one he started with.

Peace out.

Ha ha ha - score

 

[Jex =TE=]

W.T.H.

Being disgruntled with something has got the square-root of naff all to do with money over time, as such, value for money as you put it... What a stupid argument...


I was going to write a reply to this unintelligent dross and then remembered some sage advice;

Do not argue with idiots for they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Aah, but we're not replying to those people

 

[jasonbarron]

Ha ha ha - score

And...game over. Shall we all move over to the thread complaining about the lack of ultra smexy hair options? Who's with me?